Skip to main content
2:00 am
2:01 am
>> cinderella stockings. >> i like americo and adam woullike a couple founded the company and couldn't find a uhaul and business is still booming. >> i get it. it strikes me as an execution nightmare. i hope you know something about it that the couple is really good. >> like anybody in his family had to use a uhaul. what are you doing these days? >> brook field. neal, it is paying a nice dividend and a good
2:02 am
opportunity. >> inexpensive for a reason. looks like a sitting duck and i would not touch it. no growth. >> of the freedom continuous on this so will conservatives pick paul ryan to win straw poll today? we have to wait and see. we already know they are praising the new budget plan with a lot less spending in it than the president's budget plan. $4.6 trillion less over ten years. enough to balance the budget by 2023. some at forbes say it doesn't cut nearly enough. welcome to forbes on fox. let's look at the flipside with elizabeth mcdonald. john, rick, mike and mark. and john, democrats pick on the ryan plan and say it cuts too much. you say it doesn't cut nearly enough. that is the flipside.
2:03 am
explain. >> a balanced budget is not small government. under the plan government spending will increase the next ten years when we get to a balanced budget in 2023. it will be $4.1 trillion. 3.4% annual increases in spending versus 5% under the democrats plan. rean thinks this is small government. he is playing bad politics because his base put him in there to it reduce the burden of government and this will greatly expand it. >> mark, john has a point. the ryan budget averages out to $4.1 trillion a year. $500 billion a year more are than what we are spending now you with president obama. >> it actually cuts too much, david. it cuts -- >> doesn't cut at all! >> cuts $4.7 trillion over ten years and in areas that we shouldn't be cutting. >> it doesn't cut. >> we should be expanding scientific, education. areas that are going to cree jobs.reate
2:04 am
number one it will never get enacted. if it did, it is unrealistic. totally out there in disneyland. >> does at any time say a lot about where the country is that we are using terms like cut when it in fact the ryan budget plan averaged out at $4.1 trillion a year is $500 billion more than what we are now spending. >> george orwell is probably spinning in his grave at the abuse of language. are i agree with john and i lost a lot of nope, my boy paul ryan. he and the republicans should unite behind a single word. freeze. just freeze the budget. don't get into the debates about minutia which only reconcile up people like mark. freeze the darn thing. a real freeze. let the percent of federal spending go down to 18% or 19% as a percentage of gdp and we will boon. >> i don't know if mark is the only one reconciled by this. i suspect rick is a little reconciled at this as well.
2:05 am
what do you think, rick? >> it is not about the how much or how little. it is the what he is doing. i will read you one sentence that tells you everything you need to know about the budget. one short sentence on page 56 of the ryan budget that reads this budget proposes to reduce the federal auto flat th fleety 20% eastbound including the department of defense. okay to cut cars across the federal budget but can't cut 20% of the automobiles sitting outside the pentagon. that is the falsity of the budget. if you want to cut, fine, don't exclude defense. it is a dishonest budget and making pretenses that aren't real. it is nonsense. >> let us talk, though, again about how much more as john tamminy said the ryan budget is to what now. it is not a cut. it is a huge ingles it is a huge increase. cbo put out the numbers too. equal to two thirds of the world's entire gross domestic
2:06 am
product over ten years is what we will be adding on unfortunately under the ryan budget. i understand what he is trying to do and i'm fan of his and his attempts to balance the budget. when you have a budget where al gore's lock box looks better than what you put forth say hey wait a second we are spending right now a lot of money for the worst economic growth since fdr when ireland, canada, finland, sweden have shown time again the best way to get growth is cut. remove the government out of the u.s. economy. >> mike, for those who believe government is too big right now it this the best we can do, the ryan budget. in. >> no, dave. john is right we should be doing better. if we want to look at history to time when the country was its most prosperous it has always been when government spending relative to gdp was lower not larger. the last president to proside over a prolonged period of prosperity was bill clinton when got spending down to less
2:07 am
than 19% of gdp. this budget doesn't come close to that. >> if you look at spending over the past five years 2009 the big increase because of the stimulus but then the big increase doesn't go anywhere. just stays. we have a permanent stimulus amount of spending. president obama increased the amount of spending by 20% of the government. is that not the enough for you? >> it is not enough. i think we need to be spending more are. >> wow! >> on the economy right now. >> how much more? 75% of the private sector or what? >> until the private sector starts coming back and starts adding and creating more jobs. >> so you take more out of the private sector to increase the private sector? that doesn't make sense! >> we are now looking at basically, you know, right now you cutting back. cutting back. >> but that is the point what mark is saying, what mark is saying is that you you help the private sector by taking more from the private sector. in fact it should be the government. >> not necessarily, david. >> that is the only way the
2:08 am
government gets money e mack isn't it? >> taxes have to go up to pay the interest on all of the debt. i got to tell you something when you have federal reserve officials experiencing buyer's remorse over all of the u.s. treasuries they have been buying you have to say these must are supposed to bet smartest guys in the room if they are not liking the balance sheet loaded down with treasury debt and what they are trying to do to support the spending going on that is a gut reality check. >> rick, i know you are a lawyer and not an economist. >> but i play one on tv. >> the numbers don't add up, do they? >> the ryan up ins add up. >> could you think the obama numbers add up you? >> we haven't seen them yet. >> we have seen them and seen how he has spent. i'm not talking about pie in the sky. where he has spent. increased the size of the government by 20%. is it working? >> except you would agree that we are seeing the deficit come down each year is since 2009. >> good size now at 800 million?
2:09 am
>> of course, it is not at a good size. it is getting better. we are focusing on the ryan budget and i got hammer this because listen say what you will about paul ryan. i don't say a lot of niece things but he is supposed to be a leader in the area and the budget was so disingenuous it amazed me. >> wait a minute. wait a minute. paul ryan by the way has been a leader since the '80s. we have a president saying now you my goal is not to balance the budget just for balance sake. how do you act and get a fiscal responsibility into government with a president like that? >> and john, unfortunately, hold on a second, mark. we haven't heard from john in awhile. unfortunately you are not the leading the republicans right now. somebody, paul ryan put forth a plan that says it is insufficient. if it is insufficient in your eyes where do republicans go? >> where do they go? it is not the ryan way. this is not how you get back into the majority and i want to make a basic point. >> please. >> governments do not create
2:10 am
jobs. they only can create jobs in so far as they take resources from the private sector. >> got to get it some where. >> we prefer the jobs from microsoft. >> only happened once in the bible according to my reading. thank you, gang. appreciate it. first and last word interest john. is work wiping you out? no worries. some losses are seaing take a nap on the job. so why doesn't this have a lot of folks sleeping easy? >> i just wanted to make sure you knew that we did start at the usual time this morning. yeah. is isn't a half day or anything like that.
2:11 am
thank you orville and wilbur... ...amelia... neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions... in everything from the best experiences below... to the finest comforts above. we're not simply saluting history... we're making it.
2:12 am
2:13 am
lead paint poisoning affects one million children today.
2:14 am
it's also 100% preventable. if your home was built before 1978, visit leadfreekids.org to learn more. well, now you actually can fall asleep on the job. an increasing number of companies offering workers nap rooms to catch a few zs. employees say they wake up refreshed and that makes them more product investor. you say no, no to nap time. >> why sanction something that is already going on in the work place. we have have is already in the government with workers sleeping. a thousand points of night lights going on in the the government. and keeley showing the way. i say don't eat spicy food before you go to bed and go to bed early. >> that is the key. morgan? >> i'm all nor. i'm not a napper myself but it is great. you don't believe knee take a look at some of the companies doing in. >> google. ben and jerry's. aol.
2:15 am
nike. pizza hut. a long list. >> cisco. a wealth of data shows that nap time increases productivity. workers positive attitudes towards jobs and long-term memory growth. >> mike, if it works why not? >> i was wondering what was wrong with my memory. i don't nap. maybe as morgan is pointing out some large companies will do this. imagine going to the local hardware store or dry cleaners and you are in a hurry. got to come back later we are all napping. i don't think this will be a trend. >> rick, would you wake up, please? wake up, please. >> it is nap time. >> nothing personal, mike. you will have to excuse him. >> rich. a good idea or not? >> two words. winston churchill he napped and saved western civilization from the nazis. to elizabeth would you think about firing your top research scientist or sales person if they performed better if they had a nap every day.
2:16 am
>> i would say go to bed early and we need you on the job. >> but would you fire them? >> i would not fire them. >> if it was good enough for winston churchill why not? yes. >> also worked in bed which bring's last week's conversation. we were talking about how yahoo is making people come back in to work. what are we bringing them back in to work for? just to go back to sleep. it is a ridiculous thing. >> also ronald reagan used to take naps and was quoted assaying no matter what time it is wake me up even if it is in middle of a cabinet meeting. >> if it serves the shareholds and people are more productivity if they are napping on the job that is something the individual corporations hud be do. should not be a one size fits all solution. some will do this and some will not and the mash return ares will decide what is policy going forward i think. >> thomas edison used to take naps. curl up on the lab table. of course, he was there 24/7
2:17 am
but used to take naps. >> that is to rick's point. he is working around the clock. i understand that. if you you have a policy, a blanket policy that means you will have is slackers already napping on the job. there are so many ways to get around napping on the job. advice to go out to your car. advice that the computer click sounds coming off the computer so you can nap in the cubicle. ways to go to office parks outside to sleep. i mean all of these ways are already happening that is my point. >> rick is there never a time for this? this is this week particularly when we lost an hour of sleep because of daylight savings time. >> to be serious about this. here is what i don't understand. the reason you do bring people to an office is to interact and work together. if person a is taking a nap when person b is trying to get work done that needs that person you are stopping everybody from getting the work done. >> sounds like it makes sense. >> oh, my goodness. >> on a serious note here if you want to recruit and retain the best people you know there are going to be individuals and
2:18 am
smart managers learn how to arrange the teams so that everybody come out the best. and so if there are some nappers you accommodate them. if the star sales person a napper you are not going to force them to stop napping. just ridiculous. >> morgan you wanted to cut in here. >> whether it is nap time or unlimited vacation or transparent pay it indicates innovation in the work place. whether a food or good to stay. innovation in the work place and it is good for america. >> eric back lookin hitting the streets. he is finding out what other prices are going up because of the healthcare are law. at the bottom of the hour on cashing in. first right here 6 h hundred thousand tax returns botched by h and r block because of the complicated tax code. someone here says it is high time for the flat tax fix. is it? we will debate it, next. friday night, buddy.
2:19 am
2:20 am
2:21 am
you are gonna need a wingman. and my cash back keeps the party going. but my airline miles take it worldwide. [ male announcer ] it shouldn't be this hard. with creditcards.com, it's easy to search hundreds of cards and apply online. creditcards.com.
2:22 am
so how you screwed up is your tax code? so complex that even h&r block got tripped up by it. the largest tax preparer botching 600,000 customer returns. didn't fill out a field for an education credit that the irs used to let people leave blank. some of the refunds may be up to six weeks late. you have a fix for all of this. what is it? >> well, you know, it is not sur are pricing it is screwed up. the tax code is 9 million long or 12 holy bibles.
2:23 am
we to blow it up. the fairest and simplest way is some form of flat tax in the neighborhood of 15 to 20%. exempt the first $30,000 of income so poor people don't get hit. that would be fair and people could get on with business in their lives. >> rick, cutting out all of the special deals that the privileged get. and just leading to a flat tax. isn't that the definition of fairness? >> i love the idea about cutting out the special deals. two ways to look at this. have the original progressive system without all of the special deals. you don't need to go to a flat tax because i'm not so sure if we do go to the flat tax that the special teals aren't going to creep right back in. by the way, h&r block has one thing to do every year. learn the changes to the tax filing. they could have gotten this right. >> i don't know, look at how complex the last changes in taxes the deal that president obama made with congress. just made it even more complex. how can anybody get through it?
2:24 am
>> that is what happens when you have government spending. a more complex tax code to collect for it. what i'm worried about is what health reform it is doing to the tax collect 84s. the irs. turning the irs into america's museum of mass confusion. take a look at what the the treasury inspector general for tax administration said about the problem. he is so worried about the irs being at the breaking point. unprecedented in recent history the amount of responsibility irs now given in an area meaning health reform that most people don't think of as an irs problem. he said this will lead to problems. >> mark, isn't the irs just becoming too big? >> the irs is too big but a flat tax isn't going to solve our problem. it is really a reverse robinhood approach and will increase the income inequality between middle class and rich. we will be giving more benies to the rich and the middle
2:25 am
class paying a bigger percentage of their income in taxes. i don't see it as a solution. >> we just raised taxes on the rich and we are getting more disparity between the rich and the poor. so wouldn't it be better to go to a flat tax. >> i like the idea but the devillaraigosa is in the devil is in the details. i tend to lead toward the flat tax/fair tax. a flat tax put across the board and a consumption tax or payroll taxes which are still come what progressive. >> weird things about how opinions and politicians change. even president obama believes in lower tax rates or at least he did a year ago in something called principles for tax reform he says and the number one principle for tax reform lower tax rate. the tax system should be simplified and work for all americans with lower individual and corporate tax rates and fewer brackets. isn't that what the flat tax is all about?
2:26 am
>> yeah. the flat tax basically gets people out of the tax so they can devote all of their brine cycles to their business. that is one of the great virtues and draws people together. if everybody is paying the same rate then i think we can unify this country again. and to mark's worry some what justifiable about the regressive nature toward poor people, just had a $30,000 or $40,000 or $50,000 the first 30, 40, 50 is exempt from taxes. so it doesn't hit the poor. >> the first 100,000 don't pay taxes. >> it takes more brain power to figure out our taxes than to earn the income which you are taxed on. i will say that joke again. makes more liars out of the american people than golf and look at ha is going on in the federal government. federal workers owe $3.5 billion in unpaid taxes because even people in the executive branch or at treasury can't figure out their tax return. >> isn't the most unfair thing
2:27 am
about the tax code such as it is is that there is so many special deals. isn't that the thing that makes it most unfair? >> that and that the people who are so-called rich and are supposed to be paying 39% don't pay 39%. >> that's right because of all of -- get rid of the special deals. just have a flat tax for everybody. >> if it was flat you would treat income and capital gannets the same rate. >> rich, go ahead. >> it was flat, mark, you would treat income and capital gains at the same rate. mark is complaining about the difference between capital gains which is where the rich make its money or income which is where the middle class makes its money. >> romney used to see it clearly and he changed evolving on the issue as well. coming up, stocks to help you pump up your tax refund. we have the names you don't want to miss. that's next.
2:28 am
2:29 am

tv
Forbes on FOX
FOX Business March 17, 2013 2:00am-2:30am EDT

News/Business. Financial analysts offer advice on the markets. (CC)

TOPIC FREQUENCY Paul Ryan 5, Irs 3, U.s. 2, Us 2, The Irs 2, Mike 2, Rick 2, America 2, Neal 1, Pentagon 1, Eric 1, Hud 1, Winston Churchill 1, Delta 1, Uhaul 1, Google 1, Canada 1, Finland 1, Sweden 1, Ireland 1
Network FOX Business
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Virtual Ch. 130 (Fox Business)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 3/17/2013
Views
80